Traditional Allies Battle Over Pandas

This is a digitized version of an article from The Times’s print archive, before the start of online publication in 1996.
To preserve these articles as they originally appeared, The Times does not alter, edit or update them.

Occasionally the digitization process introduces transcription errors or other problems.
Please send reports of such problems to archive_feedback@nytimes.com.

A scramble by American zoos to borrow rare giant pandas from China as a way to generate large crowds has triggered a bitter dispute among longstanding allies in the animal conservation movement.

At issue is whether American zoos have been endangering the very survival of the giant panda by importing some of the few pandas in the world that would be capable of breeding in captivity, were they left in China.

The dispute has been building in professional circles over the past year or two as more and more zoos sought to display pandas, and as new information emerged to suggest that the giant pandas are in far worse danger than previously realized.

The argument erupted into full public view last week with the filing of lawsuits that pitted organizations and agencies that are all committed to preserving the giant panda against each other.

On one side are the World Wildlife Fund, a conservation organization with 475,000 members in the United States, and the American Association of Zoological Parks and Aquariums, the primary professional association for zoos. The two groups filed suit in Federal District Court here on May 24 to force the Federal Government to cancel the display of two breeding-age pandas at the Toledo Zoo in Ohio. They held that the display was a violation of the Endangered Species Act and an international agreement for the protection of endangered species.

On the other side are the Interior Department's Fish and Wildlife Service, which granted a permit to Toledo after judging that importation of the two giant pandas was ''not detrimental to the survival of the species,'' and the zoo itself, which contends that its display will not interefere with panda breeding. The zoo filed a countersuit against the World Wildlife Fund, charging that the fund was engaging in it's own ''panda profiteering'' by selling or licensing various panda products.

Feelings are running so high that each side has accused the other of crass motives. Critics of the Toledo display charge that the Fish and Wildlife Service caved in to political pressure in granting the permit despite the reservations of the agency's own professionals. They also accuse the Toledo Zoo of endangering the pandas for what they said was essentially ''a publicity and fund-raising effort.''

However, William Dennler, executive director of the Toledo Zoo, responded that the wildlife fund's suit is itself ''a major publicity stunt'' designed to attract donations from people worried about the pandas. ''I look on the suit as a membership campaign,'' he said. ''It's no different from what they're saying about us.''

A spokesman for Representative Delbert L. Latta, Republican of Ohio, acknowledged that Mr. Latta intervened on Toledo's behalf with high officials of the Interior Department to expedite processing of the permit application. But a spokesman for the Fish and Wildlife Service said his agency could not comment on any aspect of the Toledo permit because it is ''wrapped up in a court case.''

Dai Xing, third secretary in charge of cultural affairs at the Chinese embassy in Washington, said his Government regarded the pandas as ''good will ambassadors'' and had been hard-pressed to meet all the requests for panda loans conveyed by senators, congressmen, governors and other prominent Americans. He said his Government's general policy was to send only pandas under the age of six or above the age of fifteen, but he acknowledged that he was ''a bit confused'' by reports that some pandas of breeding age had been lent.

The official added that the money paid for panda loans by American zoos ''plays an important role in our panda conservation effort in China.''

The sharp polarization surrounding the lawsuits has many zoo leaders wringing their hands. ''It would be nice if everybody could sit down and work everything out without going to court,'' said Dr. Terry L. Maple, director of Zoo Atlanta, which hopes to import two non-breeding male pandas. ''Everybody in this dispute is a dedicated conservationist who wants the pandas to survive. But the positions hardened very early.''

All sides agree that the giant panda is in trouble. There are probably fewer than 1,000 giant pandas surviving in the wild in China, generally in scattered groups of fewer than 50 pandas each. The groups are so small that they are highly vulnerable to extinction from food shortages, disease, normal fluctuations in mortality, poaching and insufficient members of breeding age. Slow Rate of Reproduction

The pandas' primary enemies appear to be poaching and the loss of habitat to agricultural expansion. In February, Chinese officials shocked conservationists by announcing the recovery of 146 giant panda pelts in recent years, roughly 15 percent of the pandas estimated to be alive in 1976, when the last comprehensive survey was conducted. Most of the pandas reportedly fell victim to poachers seeking their furs or inadvertently trapping them in snares set to catch another endangered animal, the Asian musk deer, whose oil is valued in traditional medicine in Asia.

Even under the best of circumstances, pandas reproduce at a very slow rate in the wild. They require six or more years to mature, breed only in the spring, require two years between successful births, and seldom have more than one cub survive even if there is a multiple birth. The prime breeding ages for pandas are believed to be between about seven and twelve or more. Some pandas live more than two decades.

''I'm extremely discouraged about the future of the giant panda,'' said Dr. William G. Conway, general director of the New York Zoological Society, which runs the Bronx Zoo and other facilities. ''As far as we know, there are no truly viable populations remaining in nature. Unless something dramatic happens, the giant panda is as good as extinct.''

In addition to the wild pandas, 80 to 100 giant pandas are in captivity in China, and 18 are permanently in zoos outside China, where attempts have been made to breed them in captivity, with discouraging results. The National Zoo in Washington, for example, received a permanent gift of pandas from the Chinese Government but has been unable to produce a cub that survived. Ban on Permanent Gifts

Current Chinese policy bans any more permanent gifts of pandas but allows short-term loans for exhibition purposes - derisively called ''rent-a-panda deals'' by critics - provided that the borrowing zoo make no attempts to breed the pandas.

An error has occurred. Please try again later.

You are already subscribed to this email.

Such loans, typically involving the exhibition of two pandas for 100 to 200 days, have proliferated rapidly. In 1984 and 1985, pandas were loaned to the zoos in Los Angeles, San Francisco and Toronto. In 1987 and this year, the pace has quickened, with pandas being sent to the Bronx Zoo; the San Diego Zoo; the Busch Gardens theme park in Florida; Calgary, Alberta, the site of the 1988 Winter Olympics, and now Toledo.

Other institutions that are planning to import pandas for short terms, according to the wildlife fund and zoo association, include zoos in Atlanta; Columbus, Ohio; Omaha; Portland, Ore., and Seattle, as well as Disney World, in Orlando, Fla., and the Michigan State Fair. Next, said Dr. Robert O. Wagner, executive director of the zoo association, it will be shopping malls and auto dealers, or anyone else who wants to attract a crowd.

The competition is so keen that cities often use their top political leaders to plead their case. Former President Jimmy Carter helped the Zoo Atlanta get an early commitment from the Chinese, and Mayor Koch lobbied for the Bronx Zoo. Income for the Zoos

The zoos almost always stress that they are borrowing the pandas for educational and conservation purposes - to make the public aware of the plight of the panda and, by extension, of the broader problem of other endangered species. Zoo managers also point out that they typically pay China $300,000 to $500,000 to borrow the pandas. The money is said to be crucial to China's own efforts to preserve the pandas in China, and also may explain, critics say, why the Chinese have been willing to ship the endangered animals around the world.

But critics contend that another major motivation is the generation of income for the borrowing zoos. Pandas are almost always the most popular exhibit during their stay at any zoo, attracting huge crowds that swell revenues from admissions and the sale of panda-related items at zoo shops and concession stands. The San Diego Zoo, considered one of the best in the nation, increased its attendance by 35 percent and its revenues by more than $5 million during a recent half-year visit by two Chinese pandas that were not yet of breeding age, according to Jeff Jouett, a zoo spokesman.

Although the zoo's agreement with China prevents zoo officials from disclosing exactly how much was paid for the pandas, Mr. Jouett said the price was in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. However, the millions raised were used not just to help the pandas but also to improve the zoo as a whole and its other conservation and research programs, he added. Concern for Breeding Population

The Toledo Zoo clearly saw the pandas as way to increase attendance, attract new members, generate revenues to pay for a permanent primate exhibit, and ''place the Toledo Zoo on the 'map' for zoological parks,'' according to internal documents made public in the lawsuit.

Because of concern about the breeding population in China, the zoos often ask, as Toledo did, for animals that are not potential breeders. But when the Chinese send a breeding-age panda instead, no American zoo is known to have refused it.

Last year, in an action that set off alarms in the animal conservation world, the Bronx Zoo accepted a non-breeding male and a breeding-age female that ovulated during her stay in the Bronx, according to the wildlife fund and the Fish and Wildlife Service. Dr. Conway, the general director for the zoo, said the Chinese had insisted that the female, although of breeding age, was not part of a breeding program in China. Nevertheless, Dr. Conway said, if faced with the same situation today, ''I don't think we'd do it again.''

The Chinese have for decades tried panda breeding at the Beijing Zoo with only limited success, and are now building new breeding facilities inside some of the wild panda reserves. But Dr. Conway said, ''The Chinese are not attempting to breed the majority of pandas in captivity in a serious way.''

The pandas were an undeniable hit at the Bronx Zoo. Dr. Conway said a special fee that zoo visitors paid to to see the pandas had generated more than $500,000 that is being used to build one of the new panda breeding facilities in China. But he declined to estimate how much additional revenue the presence of the pandas and the sale of panda products had produced for the zoo.

In retrospect, critics lament their passivity toward the Bronx incident. ''If we had known last summer what we know now, we would have gone to the mat against the Bronx Zoo loan,'' said Kenneth A. Cook, press director for the wildlife fund. ''Clearly, that was the turning point for a lot of institutions in the United States. When the animal ovulated at the Bronx Zoo, it suggested to us there had been a major mistake.'' Never Successfully Bred

The changing sentiment against the loans caught Toledo in the midst of its negotiations with the Chinese. The zoo's leaders refused to back down and they remain angry today at what they consider unjustified criticism. Mr. Dennler, the zoo director, said that while the two pandas in Toledo are ''at the early end'' of their breeding lives, they had never mated while in China.

Moreover, the pandas left China after one breeding season and will return well before the next breeding season, he said. He charged that the critics were ''scared to death to go after New York or San Diego or Busch Gardens'' because of the prominence and influence of those institutions. ''They figured Toledo was small enough that they could work us over,'' he said.

In an effort to prevent further short-term loans of breeding-age pandas, the board of directors of the zoo association in March unanimously adopted a strict policy requiring its members to accept only pandas that are ''physiologically incapable of reproduction,'' preferably adult males born in captivity. The policy also requires that any revenues generated by the presence of the pandas be used only for panda conservation, thereby removing the temptation for zoos to import the pandas as a way to support other programs.

Although no zoo has publicly opposed the policy and most say they endorse it, some may balk at foregoing all of the panda revenues. ''I think our board would reserve the right to determine what portion, if any, was applied to pandas and what portion to other worthwile projects,'' said Gerald Borin, general manager of the zoo in Columbus, Ohio, which is seeking pandas for a major city celebration in 1992.

''We're not a zoo that says bring in any animal for the short-term to make a buck off it,'' he said. ''But zoos are businesses that have to operate.''

A version of this article appears in print on May 31, 1988, on Page C00001 of the National edition with the headline: Traditional Allies Battle Over Pandas. Order Reprints|Today's Paper|Subscribe